Rockson-Nelson Dafeamekpor
Rockson-Nelson Dafeamekpor, the Majority Chief Whip and Member of Parliament (MP) for South Dayi, has accepted responsibility for the disorder that occurred during the Appointments Committee’s session on January 30, 2025.
Speaking before the ad hoc committee investigating the incident, Mr. Dafeamekpor expressed regret over the event and acknowledged the damage caused to Parliament’s reputation.
“I take responsibility, so when my punishment came, I took it in good faith,” the Majority Chief Whip stated, emphasising the importance of leadership accountability.
He noted that while some colleagues disagreed with the disciplinary actions taken, he believed it was appropriate for leaders to be held accountable when consensus-building fails.
“Others disagreed that if punishment were to be meted out, it ought not to be me. But I might agree in principle that you need to punish the leaders for what happened,” he stressed.
Reflecting on the event of that night, Mr. Dafeamekpor attributed the chaos to a breakdown in consensus-building efforts.
He suggested that the insistence on certain procedures by his counterparts from the Minority caucus contributed to the disorder.
“Consensus building failed for that night. If my counterparts were not minded to insist on their modus operandi for that day, we wouldn’t have experienced that,” he remarked.
The incident on January 30, 2025 escalated into a physical confrontation between members of the Majority and Minority during the vetting of ministerial nominees, leading to property damage within the committee room.
Following the altercation, four MPs, including Mr. Dafeamekpor, were suspended, prompting a walkout by the Minority. The Majority proceeded with the vetting process the following day.
No Fight
The Majority Chief Whip also refuted claims of engaging in a physical altercation, explaining that his actions were aimed at restoring order, not inciting conflict.
Recounting an exchange with Alhassan Tampuli, MP for Gushegu, Mr. Dafeamekpor said, “I don’t recall ever holding his dress at all. It would have led to something else because I am also strong enough.”
He continued, “If I had held his dress, it would have led to something else. I had my two hands up, he held the front of my fugu this way. I had my hands up and I was exchanging.”
He emphasised that he was attempting to de-escalate the situation by reminding Mr. Tampuli of their shared professional background, saying, “Oh bro, why do you want us to fight over this? We are lawyers; we are custodians; we don’t do this.” Eventually, Tampuli released his grip.
“No, I didn’t fight. The Minority was interested in preventing any business from being conducted. Perhaps Tampuli didn’t like that I helped Asiedu out of his grip, but in the end, he smiled, and that was it. It was not a fight at all,” he added.
Mr. Dafeamekpor said, “I was the beneficiary, so my focus was not to get my people involved, and to make sure that even though they were intending to disrupt as much as they could, they did very little damage.”
According to him, despite the disruptions, he aimed to ensure the process continued, even after tables were flipped and cables were pulled.
He revealed that the Minority Leader had instructed his members to halt the vetting process entirely, which led to the physical disturbances observed during the session.
“The instruction was that the vetting must not go on,” Dafeamekpor said, explaining the pushback from the Minority side.
He commended his members for stepping in to restore order but acknowledged the damage that had already occurred, including the destruction of electronic equipment.
“We couldn’t do anything. The electronic gadgets were completely damaged,” he said.
He also responded to questions about the conduct of his members, defending their actions in attempting to calm the chaos. “I would rather commend them for trying to ensure that order was restored,” Dafeamekpor said, noting that the intervention of MPs from the Majority side helped prevent further escalation.
In his proposals for improving the vetting process, the Majority Chief Whip suggested a change of venue as a potential solution to avoid similar disruptions in the future.
“We must consider relocating to a new venue, such as the Speaker’s conference room, to prevent the chaos from following us,” he proposed.
He also called for stricter protocols, including limiting the number of people accompanying nominees and setting clear timeframes for questioning, particularly for Ranking Members.
He also acknowledged the difficulty in managing the Ranking Member’s extensive questioning during vetting sessions.
“They have such massive power,” he said, noting that this could lead to extended sessions that were not always productive.
He suggested introducing clearer time limits for all members to prevent the process from dragging on for too long.
By Ernest Kofi Adu